Roseburg review. [volume] (Roseburg, Or.) 1885-1920, 1887-10-28
THE PROHIBITION AHENDMENT

EDITOR RosEBURG REVIEW: In aformer
article, | inquired, whether the amendment
was reasonable; now | want to see, whether
1t is necessary and effective. If it is the pur
pose of the prohi, TO prevent only the injurious
consequence of liquor drinking, are not our
present laws sufficient without interfering with
and depriving me of my natural right to make
cider for the manufacture of apple butter?
We have a law to punish for selling intoxi-
eating liquors to minor, TO drunkard, or
to any one, while drunk. We have a civil
damage-law, whereby anyone damaged by the
sale Of liquor, can recover his damages from
the seller. Our present license law is as good
as local option law, as it requires majority
of the voters on petition, in order to obtain
license to sell. We have & law against selling
adulterated drinks Now these laws will
greatly reduce the injurious effects Of liquor
drinking But the prohls say, these laws are
not enforced Well, why don't you? and if
| these reasonable laws are Sc hard to enforce,
| how can you. expect to enforce law which
depnves me Of my right to buy brandy, for
the making of mince- pies? Do you think, the
more severe Il law, the easier it is enforced?
Again, why make an exception by saying, ex-
cept for medical, mechanical or scientific
purposes? Is that not big hole TO crawl out
for drunkard, the very person that should be
looked after? Again why does not the amend
ment forbid the buying Of liquor7 What will
prevent the drunkard from sending to Califer-
MIA for a keg of liquor and sharing the same
with his comrades, by loaning the same1 And
suppose the legislature does not pass law
as required what then? Free whiskey.
We can see the difficulty of enforcing pro.
hibition law by the prohi states, continually
changing their laws for a better enforcement,
and more and more cncroaching upon con.
stitutional rights as the law, removing an
officer by the governor upon simple affidavit
Of failure to enforce the law; the possession O
having made prima facie evidence Of wrongful
acquisition Of same, the search OF houses upor
simple guess work; the proposal to let only
the state manufacture and sell. II a prohibi
ton law is so beneficial to us, why were 81
few votes polled for St. John? II l lived il
Kansas or Iowa and saw those great effect
las claiHed by prohi) of prohibition amend
ment, would certainly dropped the democratic
or republican ticket, voted for St. John ant
helped extend this beneficial law all owe
the U. S. Do you know of prohi leade
going into saloon and looking after the en-
, forcement OF our present laws? Motifs easier
more popular and more renumerative t
preach in favor Of prohibition, than to tax
silent steps to reform drunkard or keep
! minor from becoming such; if parents woul
, set better examples and look more after the
children, and less after making money, salool
would be diminishing. Are we no bett,
= than hogs that cannot withstand temptation
De we force man TO quit raising watermelon
in order to keep boys from being tempted
i steal them? Let us have high license i
: those than can afford the luxury OF stimuan
pay for them, and pick out those that are hog
not men and reform them.
= WM, THIEL,